JJ Abrams wants to know how Guri would have ended LOST
- Thread starter Larry Young
- Start date
Larry Young
Master Member
Who said Jacob thought his mother was crazy? He was against Barry leaving because he thought he was the embodiment of evil and that the world would be destroyed under his influence. They spell that one out pretty clearly. Or, as Nick says eloquently: "It is not difficult to understand why one leaving and not the other is a problem. "
You probably really like "Sympathy for the Devil." :lol
Why would I do that? You want to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs.
The last thing LOST had trouble with was character motivation.
Guri
Sr Member
Full disclosure: I'm a serious Jacob apologist, so, if you are determined to hate him or see him as the bad guy, you probably aren't going to like what I have to say... but, if you're on the fence or curious for his motivations, here's my take on it... parts of this are lifted from a post on Lostpedia Forums where I tried to sum up threads and threads of discussion on the matter.
1) MIB was not evil as a man, he was just a smart, curious and creative guy who saw through his mom's craziness but had to live with people who didn't know him and with whom he didn't connect - yet he believed he could find it, that there was a 'home' somewhere for him. Jacob was more naive and frightened of things he didn't understand (like his brother's claims) so he opted to stay with the only one he'd ever known - fake mom and the island was his home.
2) Jacob was not stupid before he became protector, as evidenced by him watching to see if mother was right rather than taking her or his brother's word for it. He loved his brother as we see them having friendly visits with MIB.
2) When fake mom does her job in a horrific, crazy way, and then forces her job on Jacob, she does it without giving him any instructions except vague explanation of what the Light is. Jacob does not become all knowing and all powerful, he doesn't know what she did to his brother or their people, he doesn't know his brother's intentions - he knows there's a storm and he's going to get fire wood. Jacob has to figure EVERYTHING out. So, the mistake he makes in a fit of rage when MIB exacts the only justice there is on the island (I contend he was not evil before he was smoked), is done without knowing what will happen.
3) MIB's body/matter was destroyed, but his spirit was trapped on the island (rules of mom or Source phenomena) and contaminated by the 'sickness'. However, because of what happened to him, unlike those who are still alive, he no longer had that Light 'that is inside everyone' to fight against the evil - like Sayid and Claire did. In essence, at the moment of smokification, MIB became infected with the evil and impossible to cure/redeem and worse, a carrier of the sickness of evil that can infect others.
MIB had to know his physical form had changed, however, he likely didn't feel like a different person but MIB's personality didn't change. He didn't see his actions as any different either - people were still a means to an end, he still wanted off the island, he still believed people were not good, the only difference is, he had lost his light/conscience and ability to ever be convinced otherwise.
4) It probably took Jacob a while to figure out what had happened to his brother both
a) that the smoke was his brother and
b) that as Smokey he wasn't just angry about being killed, losing his humanity and not being able to leave, but Jacob probably had to learn that his brother had also lost that Light inside of him, and was not redeemable
All the show gave us is that somehow Jacob knew - I contend he had to figure it out and in my fan fiction "Being Protector" it was a painful, soul searching experience for Jacob and deep down, just like with Ben, he hoped he was wrong about his brother - but had to plan for if he wasn't.
Most people who don't like Jacob imagine he never even tried, but that doesn't fit with the Jacob I saw on the show. He believed in the worst of the worst - Sayid, for crying out loud... why would he not also believe in his own brother whom he loved and whom he regretted hurting and who wasn't really a bad guy at all before he got smoked?
5) I believe Jacob had several reasons for bringing people to the island and they all have to do with his fundamental question of proving there is good in people.
a) Proving his brother wrong wasn't just an 'in your face' game, I believe Jacob was trying to redeem his brother, if it was possible, and thought that by convincing him people had good in them maybe some day his smoked brother would somehow believe there was still good in himself as well.
b) Jacob was trying to help people that the island showed to him. Somehow, either through visions or the lighthouse Jacob did learn to see people off the island - he saw they were flawed, like him, that they were suffering, he saw their past and maybe even their potential future. He likely saw also that the island could help them heal. His question to himself would be - should he let them suffer off the island, or risk bringing them to the island where they could start over and heal.
Jacob believed if given a second chance, people had good in them and could come out of the dark places of their situations. The island would help convince those people of the goodness, if those people let it.
c) Jacob needed to find replacements for himself and he had to test them to see what kind of person could handle the job of protector. The most important job requirement in his mind was knowing good without having to be told. Many people interpret what he told Richard as some sort of sick ignore people who need his help - as if Jacob was God. But what Jacob says is that, if he has to tell them what to do, 'it was pointless' Does that mean the game is pointless? No. I think it means he needed a successor who could carry on without him after he was gone. Someone who would be able to survive the island, his brother, know people were worth saving and figure out the right thing to do in difficult circumstances without having to be told.
I don't think Jacob was all good - I think he was flawed. But I think the key difference in Lost about the two sides isn't about being good or being evil.... not even doing good or doing evil.
It's about what are you trying to do, even if you fail, even if you think you're a terrible person or if you'll lose everything, do you still have a bit of light inside of you?
Ilana is another key element to understanding Jacob - the closest person to him we ever get to see ends up forgiving the one who killed him? That speaks volumes not just for who she was, but for who Jacob must have been to inspire not just loyalty, but loyalty to his values.
The thing I loved most about what Lost did with it's main characters is it took flawed, self-loathing people who were lonely and had nobody - and it gave them each other, something to believe in, something worth fighting and worthy dying for... and it brought us along with it.
The mythology of Jacob, as I see it, is - that was his plan.
And sometimes people need someone to believe in them in order to believe in themselves.
1) MIB was not evil as a man, he was just a smart, curious and creative guy who saw through his mom's craziness but had to live with people who didn't know him and with whom he didn't connect - yet he believed he could find it, that there was a 'home' somewhere for him. Jacob was more naive and frightened of things he didn't understand (like his brother's claims) so he opted to stay with the only one he'd ever known - fake mom and the island was his home.
2) Jacob was not stupid before he became protector, as evidenced by him watching to see if mother was right rather than taking her or his brother's word for it. He loved his brother as we see them having friendly visits with MIB.
2) When fake mom does her job in a horrific, crazy way, and then forces her job on Jacob, she does it without giving him any instructions except vague explanation of what the Light is. Jacob does not become all knowing and all powerful, he doesn't know what she did to his brother or their people, he doesn't know his brother's intentions - he knows there's a storm and he's going to get fire wood. Jacob has to figure EVERYTHING out. So, the mistake he makes in a fit of rage when MIB exacts the only justice there is on the island (I contend he was not evil before he was smoked), is done without knowing what will happen.
3) MIB's body/matter was destroyed, but his spirit was trapped on the island (rules of mom or Source phenomena) and contaminated by the 'sickness'. However, because of what happened to him, unlike those who are still alive, he no longer had that Light 'that is inside everyone' to fight against the evil - like Sayid and Claire did. In essence, at the moment of smokification, MIB became infected with the evil and impossible to cure/redeem and worse, a carrier of the sickness of evil that can infect others.
MIB had to know his physical form had changed, however, he likely didn't feel like a different person but MIB's personality didn't change. He didn't see his actions as any different either - people were still a means to an end, he still wanted off the island, he still believed people were not good, the only difference is, he had lost his light/conscience and ability to ever be convinced otherwise.
4) It probably took Jacob a while to figure out what had happened to his brother both
a) that the smoke was his brother and
b) that as Smokey he wasn't just angry about being killed, losing his humanity and not being able to leave, but Jacob probably had to learn that his brother had also lost that Light inside of him, and was not redeemable
All the show gave us is that somehow Jacob knew - I contend he had to figure it out and in my fan fiction "Being Protector" it was a painful, soul searching experience for Jacob and deep down, just like with Ben, he hoped he was wrong about his brother - but had to plan for if he wasn't.
Most people who don't like Jacob imagine he never even tried, but that doesn't fit with the Jacob I saw on the show. He believed in the worst of the worst - Sayid, for crying out loud... why would he not also believe in his own brother whom he loved and whom he regretted hurting and who wasn't really a bad guy at all before he got smoked?
5) I believe Jacob had several reasons for bringing people to the island and they all have to do with his fundamental question of proving there is good in people.
a) Proving his brother wrong wasn't just an 'in your face' game, I believe Jacob was trying to redeem his brother, if it was possible, and thought that by convincing him people had good in them maybe some day his smoked brother would somehow believe there was still good in himself as well.
b) Jacob was trying to help people that the island showed to him. Somehow, either through visions or the lighthouse Jacob did learn to see people off the island - he saw they were flawed, like him, that they were suffering, he saw their past and maybe even their potential future. He likely saw also that the island could help them heal. His question to himself would be - should he let them suffer off the island, or risk bringing them to the island where they could start over and heal.
Jacob believed if given a second chance, people had good in them and could come out of the dark places of their situations. The island would help convince those people of the goodness, if those people let it.
c) Jacob needed to find replacements for himself and he had to test them to see what kind of person could handle the job of protector. The most important job requirement in his mind was knowing good without having to be told. Many people interpret what he told Richard as some sort of sick ignore people who need his help - as if Jacob was God. But what Jacob says is that, if he has to tell them what to do, 'it was pointless' Does that mean the game is pointless? No. I think it means he needed a successor who could carry on without him after he was gone. Someone who would be able to survive the island, his brother, know people were worth saving and figure out the right thing to do in difficult circumstances without having to be told.
I don't think Jacob was all good - I think he was flawed. But I think the key difference in Lost about the two sides isn't about being good or being evil.... not even doing good or doing evil.
It's about what are you trying to do, even if you fail, even if you think you're a terrible person or if you'll lose everything, do you still have a bit of light inside of you?
Ilana is another key element to understanding Jacob - the closest person to him we ever get to see ends up forgiving the one who killed him? That speaks volumes not just for who she was, but for who Jacob must have been to inspire not just loyalty, but loyalty to his values.
The thing I loved most about what Lost did with it's main characters is it took flawed, self-loathing people who were lonely and had nobody - and it gave them each other, something to believe in, something worth fighting and worthy dying for... and it brought us along with it.
The mythology of Jacob, as I see it, is - that was his plan.
And sometimes people need someone to believe in them in order to believe in themselves.
R.P. McMurphy
Well-Known Member
Guri, Love it! I miss LOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Larry Young
Master Member
Yeah, holy crap, Guri. You're a scholar.
Guri
Sr Member
*Shameless Plug*
If you like to read, then read my four LOST fan fictions!
They are heavy on MIB and Jacob because I wanted to fill in the blanks the show left. I wrote them as I was figuring things out, so there are some details that don't mesh with my current understanding, but they are more for entertainment and to bring the characters back alive than anything.1- Wheel of Fortune (During Across the Sea - MIB, Charlotte and some Jacob) So much fun... crosses over with Lost Love
2 - Being Protector (Right after Across the Sea up until Richard comes - Jacob and MIB) - can be a stand alone without the other stories
3 - Lost Love (30 years after Richard comes until the end of Lost - Jacob, Ilana's mother ( an Original Character), Ilana, Richard and a bit of MIB and other Losties) The longest and most detailed story.
4 - The Others Ever After (The flash sideways of those who didn't get a complete passing in The End - Ilana, MIB, Charlotte, OC, MIB and a little Richard, Ben and Daniel) Very short 5 chapter story that also answers the question - How does GURI think Lost should have ended.
There's enough there to keep busy for a while.
Heh, thanks. This show has occupied way, way too much of my time this past year and a half... Not regretting it though.
Larry Young
Master Member
I'm in the middle of watching Season Four again on the treadmill, and even when I know what's going to happen, I still get drawn into it!
Egon Spengler
Master Member
Guri, you're a bad ass LOST fan. Nice!!!
JediG60racer
Sr Member
the end needed a pissed off giraffe and a dinosaur battling it out on the island... just to throw a bone to what viewers were thinking in the first few episodes of the first season.
R.P. McMurphy
Well-Known Member
I totally agree with this. And, as you stated earlier, when you rewatch from the beginning, all the purgatory clues are there. Some, rather blatantly. I also agree that the "flash sideways" was a way for TPTB to say say, "look it wasn't purgatory from the beginning, you didn't figure us out right away, we had this all planned from the beginning." Just like Gary Troup wasn't another purgatory clue.
Either way, LOST was the greatest show I have ever experienced on television.
Guri
Sr Member
:$ Thanks.
It seems a little crazy, at least to people not on this forum. That was the guy that wrote 'Bad Twin' or some such that Sawyer was reading? He got sucked up into the engine, right?
How did people think he was a purgatory clue? I missed that theory.
Larry Young
Master Member
I love that the only way to make a better show than The Prisoner, you had to put Evangeline Lily, Michelle Rodriguez and Elizabeth Mitchell in it.
Larry Young
Master Member
"Gary Troup" is an anagram for "purgatory." That's what got me watching for anagrams.
Guri
Sr Member
Haha! Was that on purpose?? Such stinkers they are if it was.
I never got into the easter egg clue searching or pod casting theory developing.
From what I can tell, many of those were red herrings, so it's a good thing.
I do remember hearing well after the show that people thought that's what Jacob was when they first saw him on the incident because of this:
:lol
It is no wonder so many people were so mad.
I never got into the easter egg clue searching or pod casting theory developing.
From what I can tell, many of those were red herrings, so it's a good thing.
I do remember hearing well after the show that people thought that's what Jacob was when they first saw him on the incident because of this:
:lol
It is no wonder so many people were so mad.
Larry Young
Master Member
Nice!
I might have put Hurley at Lawful Good and Rousseau at Lawful Neutral, but that's a quibble.
I might have put Hurley at Lawful Good and Rousseau at Lawful Neutral, but that's a quibble.
Guri
Sr Member
I really wanted to put Hugo (I insist on Hugo for some reason... maybe because that's what Jacob called him) on the chart but I didn't know where. He's good for sure, but the modifiers had me stumped. He just doesn't fit any of them, from what I can tell.
Lawful Good - I'd argue most against this one - he's really not all that into rules. Subplots like his reaction to getting all that money or being put in charge of the hatch food demonstrate he is unwilling to set up even an internal set of rules that make logical sense that he can follow and hold other people to under his authority. As for following rules, he seems to be someone who follows people - the only thing I can remember where he talks about needing to follow a rule is at the end with Ben, discussing how he can't help Desmond get home because 'people can't leave the island' - even then he seems to think it's more about 'able to' and not 'rules' - Ben sets him straight.
Chaotic good might better because he does seem to switch allegiances if he can find a compelling reason - as when he argued to stay on the island with Locke, leaving Team Jack because of his friend Charlie. But again, that was because he believed in his friendship, which is not law, but not really chaotic. Hugo can be counted on to believe in people, to care for people and that is not really chaotic.
Unlike with Jack and Locke who you could never tell who they would throw under the bus should it conflict with what they thought was the 'right/good' thing to do. Hugo's biggest problem taking charge of anything was not wanting to hurt people or to get involved in conflicts. He only took a stand when he was following some person he believed in. Also, he didn't hate rules (like John's 'don't tell me what I can't do!') or Jack's constant fighting authority because of his daddy issues...
Neutral Good - seems the most fitting, but I always get the sense of 'apathetic' when it comes to neutral modifiers of alignments. Richard seems apathetic to rules - they are there and he will follow them when they suit him, but he has no problem going around them - like when he gives Locke Sawyer's folder or when he tells the Other worrying about him taking Ben to the temple that he 'doesn't answer to' Eli or Charles.
Hugo is really an enigma in my mind... I'd love to hear your reasons for putting him in Lawful, though.
Rousseau - she's crazy, so I always put crazy people in chaotic. haha! Good I agree with, except that she was trying to hurt Sayid, right? I forget... She was all about getting Alex back, and helping other mothers, but a good person you can trust to do the right thing - or at least try - she seemed to not be completely reliable, it depended on if she thought you were a threat, which seems neutral. I'd love to hear more of your arguments for the neutral and good alignments before I'll make a call.
Lawful Good - I'd argue most against this one - he's really not all that into rules. Subplots like his reaction to getting all that money or being put in charge of the hatch food demonstrate he is unwilling to set up even an internal set of rules that make logical sense that he can follow and hold other people to under his authority. As for following rules, he seems to be someone who follows people - the only thing I can remember where he talks about needing to follow a rule is at the end with Ben, discussing how he can't help Desmond get home because 'people can't leave the island' - even then he seems to think it's more about 'able to' and not 'rules' - Ben sets him straight.
Chaotic good might better because he does seem to switch allegiances if he can find a compelling reason - as when he argued to stay on the island with Locke, leaving Team Jack because of his friend Charlie. But again, that was because he believed in his friendship, which is not law, but not really chaotic. Hugo can be counted on to believe in people, to care for people and that is not really chaotic.
Unlike with Jack and Locke who you could never tell who they would throw under the bus should it conflict with what they thought was the 'right/good' thing to do. Hugo's biggest problem taking charge of anything was not wanting to hurt people or to get involved in conflicts. He only took a stand when he was following some person he believed in. Also, he didn't hate rules (like John's 'don't tell me what I can't do!') or Jack's constant fighting authority because of his daddy issues...
Neutral Good - seems the most fitting, but I always get the sense of 'apathetic' when it comes to neutral modifiers of alignments. Richard seems apathetic to rules - they are there and he will follow them when they suit him, but he has no problem going around them - like when he gives Locke Sawyer's folder or when he tells the Other worrying about him taking Ben to the temple that he 'doesn't answer to' Eli or Charles.
Hugo is really an enigma in my mind... I'd love to hear your reasons for putting him in Lawful, though.
Rousseau - she's crazy, so I always put crazy people in chaotic. haha! Good I agree with, except that she was trying to hurt Sayid, right? I forget... She was all about getting Alex back, and helping other mothers, but a good person you can trust to do the right thing - or at least try - she seemed to not be completely reliable, it depended on if she thought you were a threat, which seems neutral. I'd love to hear more of your arguments for the neutral and good alignments before I'll make a call.
